TRADES-UNIONISM  DEFENDED. 


♦ 

-Labor  is  the  Superior  of  Capital  and  Deserves  much  the  Higher  Consideration. — 
Abraham  Lincoln. 


STATEMENT 


Columbia  Typographical  Union 

No.  lOl, 


CONCERNING  THE  ATTACK  OX 


LABOR  ORGANIZATIONS 

IN  THE 


UNITED  STATES  SENATE. 


WASHINGTON.  D.  (  . 

E.  W.  OYSTER.  PRINTER. 

No.  339  Penna.  Avenue. 

1888. 


33 1'.SI 


REPORT 


OF  A 

SPECIAL  COMMITTEE  APPOINTED  BY  COLUMBIA  TYPOGRAPHICAL. 
UNION  TO  OPPOSE  ANY  INTERFERENCE  BY  CONGRESS 
WITH  THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  LABORING  CLASSES  TO 
ORGANIZE  FOR  SELF-PROTECTION  AGAINST 
THE  ENCROACHMENTS  OF  CAPITAL. 


To  the  President  and  Members  of  Columbia  Typographical  Union , 

JVo.  i  oi : 

Gentlemen  :  Your  committee  respectfully  submit  their  report,  as 
follows : 

On  February  24,  1883,  there  occurred  in  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  on  an  amendment  to  the  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial 
appropriation  bill,  increasing  the  salary  of  the  Public  Printer,  the  fol¬ 
lowing  debate : 

Mr.  Beck.  I  voted  for  this  increase,  and  desire  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Rhode 
Island  a  question  in  regard  to  this  Printing  Office.  I  understand  that  the  Public  Printer 
has  hardly  any  control  over  his  printers ;  that  they  are  run  by  some  league  or  printers’ 
union  or  something  else  outside  of  the  Government,  so  that  he  is  absolutely  at  the 
mercy  of  some  outside  association  both  as  to  the  wages  of  his  men  and  as  to  the  men 
he  shall  employ,  and  that  he  can  not  do  anything  unless  he  has  the  assent  of  some 
outside  organization.  What  is  the  truth  about  that  ? 

Mr.  Anthony.  There  is  too  much  truth  in  that.  There  is  a  typographical  asso¬ 
ciation  in  this  District  composed  of  employes,  who  assume,  without  consulting  the 
employers,  to  fix  the  rate  of  compensation;  and  if  any  person  not  a  member  of  that 
association  Ls  employed  in  any  establishment  all  those  who  belong  to  it  leave.  It  is 
a  tyranny  which  the  craft  would  not  submit  to  if  it  was  ordained  by  law,  but  which 
they  impose  upon  themselves  for  their  own  benefit. 

Mr.  Beck.  If  the  Committee  on  Printing  or  any  other  body  in  this  Government 
has  any  power  to  emancipate  the  Government  of  the  United  States  from  the  control 
of  an  organization  of  that  sort  by  placing  power  in  the  hands  of  the  Public  Printer 
or  anybody  else,  I  am  willing  to  vote  him  any  amount  of  money,  I  do  not  care  what 
it  is,  so  that  this  Government  shall  not  be  dictated  to  by  any  association. 

Mr.  Anthony.  I  am  in  full  sympathy  with  the  Senator  from  Kentucky  on  that 
point.  The  Committee  on  Printing  have  once,  and  I  think  twice,  reported  a  reso- 


p  55  5 


4 


lution,  which  has  been  adopted  by  the  Senate,  instructing  the  Public  Printer  to 
employ  his  men  for  the  best  interest  of  the  Government  according  to  the  market- 
price  of  wages;  but  it  has  not  met  the  approbation  of  the  other  House  of  Congress; 
and  now  there  is  a  law  of  Congress  which  requires  the  Public  Printer  to  pay  to  com¬ 
positors  a  larger  sum  than  is  paid  by  the  private  printers  down  street.  This  typo¬ 
graphical  association  fixes  the  price  of  composition,  and  then  remits  to  the  private 
employers  a  portion  of  the  rate. 

Mr.  Beck.  I  only  desire  to  call  attention  to  it  because  the  attention  of  the  Com¬ 
mittee  on  Appropriations  was  called  to  it  sharply.  While  I  know  nothing  about 
this  association  and  do  not  mean  to  reflect  on  it,  I  want  to  be  entirely  free  from  its 
influence  and  power,  and  if  the  Committee  on  Printing  can  devise  any  way  to  do  it, 
it  will  get  my  vote.. 

Mr.  Anthony.  The  Committee  on  Printing  has  devised  a  way  and  it  has  been 
adopted  by  the  Senate,  but  has  not  met  the  approbation  of  the  other  House  of 
Congress. 

Mr.  Rollins.  I  want  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Rhode  Island,  who  understands 
this  matter  fully,  how  much  more  the  Government  is  required  to  pay  for  work  in 
the  Government  Printing  Office  by  reason  of  this  Union  than  is  paid  in  the  private 
'establishments  in  the  city  of  Washington  ?  That  is  a  fair  test. 

Mr.  Anthony.  I  suppose  the  difference  is  about  20  per  cent.,  but  the  Public 
Printer  is  compelled  to  pay  it,  not  by  that  typographical  organization  but  by  a  higher 
power,  by  the  power  of  Congress,  which  fixes  the  rate  of  compensation.  The  law 
fixes  the  rate  of  compensation  at  a  higher  rate  than  is  paid  to  other  employes  of 
the  same  character. 

Now,  my  sympathies  are  all  with  the  interests  of  labor,  and  I  desire  that  every 
man  who  works  with  his  hands  shall  receive  the  highest  compensation  that  is  con¬ 
sistent  with  the  good  of  the  business  in  which  he  is  employed  ;  but  I  do  not  recog¬ 
nize  the  right  of  the  employes  of  an  establishment,  without  consulting  the  employer, 
to  fix  the  rate  of  labor,  and  to  fix  that  for  the  Government  higher  than  it  is  fixed 
for  private  employes.  A  majority  of  this  typographical  association  are  employed  in 
the  Government  Printing  Office,  so  that  the  employes  of  the  Government  Printing 
Office  fix  the  rate  of  wages,  and  then,  after  imposing  it  upon  the  Government,  remit 
a  portion  of  it  to  private  establishments. 

Mr.  Rollins.  Is  it  not  the  fact  that  they  practically  dictate  to  the  Public  Printer 
who  shall  be  employed  ? 

Air.  Anthony.  They  do  so  far  as  that  he  shall  not  employ  any  man  who  does  not 
belong  to  the  Typographical  Union. 

Mr.  Rollins.  In  other  words,  if  he  undertook  to. employ  to-day  or  to-morrow  or 
any  other  day  a  practical  printer,  if  he  did  it  even  from  charitable  considerations,  if 
he  found  here  in  the  city  of  Washington  a  poor  printer  starving  for  bread  who  did 
not  belong  to  this  Union,  could  he  do  it  under  the  present  regulations? 

Mr.  Anthony.  The  members  of  the  union  would  all  leave  the  Government 
Printing  Office. 

Mr.  Rollins.  That  is  what  I  wanted  to  get  at. 

Mr.  Hale.  Mr.  President,  these  are  most  remarkable  statements.  It  seems  to 
me  that  they  must  fall  with  startling  effect  upon  Senatois’  ears,  that  a  great  govern- 


5 


mental  establishment  upon  which’  we  expend  millions  of  dollars  annually  is  hope¬ 
lessly  and  helplessly  in  the  hands  of  a  private,  and  for  aught  I  know  secret,  associ¬ 
ation  that  dominates  its  whole  management,  that  controls  the  choice  of  employes, 
so  that  those  who  are  not  favored  of  the  mechanics  of  the  United  States  that  belong 
to  vocations  that  are  involved  in  this  office  can  not  have  a  competition  there  with 
the  men  that  do  belong  to  this  private  association.  Is  it  a  fact  that  all  the  printers, 
the  type-setters,  or  the  employes  of  any  kind  in  the  Government  Printing  Office 
must  be  taken  from  one  organization  to  the  exclusion  of  the  thousands  in  the  United 
States  who  do  not  belong  to  it  ?  Why,  sir,  if  a  tyranny  of  this  kind  exists  to  day 
and  pervades  the  Government  Printing  Office  there  ought  not  to  be  one  dollar 
more  appropriated  until  we  call  a  halt  and  this  tyranny  is  removed  and  the  Govern¬ 
ment  Printing  Office  is  put  open  to  every  person  skillful  enough  to  do  the  work  done 
there,  whether  he  belongs  to  this  association  or  not.  I  should  be  glad  to  know 
whether  the  Public  Printer  is  in  sympathy  with  this  performance  and  whether  he 
submits  to  it  or  whether  he  protests  against  it.  I  should  be  glad  if  the  chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Printing,  if  he  knows  about  that,  would  give  some  information 
to  the  Senate. 

Mr.  Anthony.  What  is  the  use  of  his  protesting  when  we  have  imposed  upon  him 
by  law  rates  which  are  even  higher  than  those  fixed  by  the  Typographical  Union  ? 

Mr.  Hale.  Do  we  impose  on  him  the  necessity  of  being  controlled,  dominated 
by  this  union  or  association  as  to  the  men  that  he  employs? 

Mr.  Anthony.  We  do  not;  but  then  if  he  does  not  obey  the  behests  of  that  asso¬ 
ciation  the  Government  Printing  Office  stops. 

Mr.  Hale.  Then  clearly  the  Government  Printer  at  the  close  of  the  present  ses¬ 
sion  of  Congress  ought  to  begin  deliberately  and  ruthlessly  to  weed  out  from  that 
office  every  man  who  belongs  to  this  union,  and  summon  from  the  great  cities  of 
this  country  where  they  will  be  found  other  men  who  do  not  belong  to  it,  so  that  in 
an  emergency  when  Congress  is  sitting  and  the  work  must  be  done  we  shall  not  be 
at  the  mercy  of  this  union. 

Mr.  Anthony.  I  quite  agree  with  the  Senator,  and  if  Congress  will  give  the 
Public  Printer  power  to  do  that  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  he  will  exercise  it. 

Mr.  Hale.  What  power  would  he  need  embodied  in  this  bill  to  do  that  ? 

Mr.  Anthony.  That  he  shall  employ  his  labor  at  the  market  price  of  wages  for 
the  best  interest  of  the  Government.  I  think  that  the  printers  in  the  Government 
Printing  Office  are  entitled  to  a  little  higher  pay  than  those  in  private  establish¬ 
ments,  because  their  employment  is  somewhat  uncertain.  Sometimes  there  is  a  very 
great  press  of  work  and  a  large  number  of  men  are  employed  ;  then  the  work  falls 
off,  and  they  are  furloughed ;  but,  expecting  to  be  recalled  again,  they  do  not  leave 
the  city  and  have  to  remain  here  unemployed.  I  think  there  ought  to  be  some  in¬ 
crease  of  compensation  over  that  in  private  establishments  where  they  have  steady 
work.  But  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  printers  in  the  Government  Printing  Office 
work  only  eight  hours,  and  that  they  receive  higher  compensation  than  printers  down 
town  who  work  ten  hours. 

Mr.  Hale.  I  am  not  so  much  troubled  about  the  rates  that  are  paid,  because  I 
am  not  intelligent  upon  that  matter  ;  there  may  be  reasons  why  it  should  be  so,  but 
upon  the  other  great  Question  that  this  office  should  not  be  controlled  and  tyrannized 


0 


over  by  this  association  I  have  no  doubt.  It  ought  to  be  open  to  the  whole  country 
and  not  under  this  control. 

I  wish  the  Senator  from  Rhode  Island,  who  has  had  this  matter  upon  his  mind, 
would  frame  some  clause  that  he  can  add,  to  which  I  do  not  believe  a  single  Sena¬ 
tor  will  object,  that  shall  give  the  superintendent  of  this  great  office  the  opportunity, 
after  this  Congress  shall  have  closed  and  ended  its  labors,  to  begin  at  once  and  weed 
out  the  office  so  that  we  shall  control  it  hereafter.  When  I  say  “  we  ”  I  mean  Con¬ 
gress  and  the  people,  and  not  this  association. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia.  I  think  the  suggestion  coming  from  the  Senator 
from  Maine  a  very  good  one,  but  this  bill  is  not  the  place  for  it.  The  sundry  civil 
bill,  as  we  all  know,  is  pending  in  the  other  House,  where  it  is  probable  that  the 
appropriation  for  public  printing  is  made,  and  on  that  bill  some  regulation  could 
very  properly  be  added. 

Mr.  Hale.  That  may  be  so,  and  that  is  a  bill  yet  to  be  considered  by  the  Com¬ 
mittee  on  Appropriations.  It  can  clearly  be  done  without  trenching  on  the  rule  of 
the  Senate  already  adopted  of  not  putting  on  legislation,  because  it  can  be  put  in  the 
form  of  a  limitation  on  the  expenditure  of  the  money  appropriated.  I  do  not  know 
but  that  is  the  proper  place ;  probably  it  is. 

Mr.  Plumb.  I  wish  to  say  in  regard  to  this  matter  that  there  is  really  nothing  re¬ 
quired  now.  The  Public  Printer  can  do  that  now  if  he  sees  fit. 

Mr.  Davis.  Perhaps  he  wants  some  encouragement  from  Congress. 

Mr.  Plumb.  He  may  want  the  encouragement.  He  came  there  and  found  that 
this  printers’  union  was  absolutely  running  the  establishment.  They  have  a  rule 
which  fixes  the  number  of  apprentices  the  Public  Printer  may  employ — twenty,  I 
think  it  is — and  no  other  person  can  be  employed  under  their  rule  in  the  Government 
Printing  Office  unless  he  belongs  to  the  Columbia  Typographical  Union,  an  institu 
tion  of  this  city. 

Mr.  Hale.  I  am  told  by  a  Senator  that  an  order  has  been  really  issued  from  the 
bead  of  this  establishment  that  no  man  shall  be  taken  on  to  its  rolls  unless  he  belongs 
to  this  association.  Does  the  Senator  know  whether  that  be  true  ? 

Mr.  Plumb.  I  know  that  that  is  true,  and  I  know,  further  than  that - 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia.  Allow  me  to  ask  the  Senator  a  question.  Do  I 
understand  that  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Printing  himself  has  issued  an  order 
to  that  effect  ? 

Mr.  Plumb.  No;  but  the  Typographical  Union,  I  understand. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia.  But  I  understood  the  Senator  to  say  that  from  the 
head  of  this  printing  bureau  there  was  such  an  order  issued ;  am  I  correct  in  that? 

Mr.  Plumb.  I  spoke  of  the  association. 

Mr.  Hale.  I  was  told  that  it  was  the  superintendent  of  the  establishment  who 
issued  the  order.  That  may  not  be  so. 

Mr.  Anthony.  Oh,  no. 

Mr.  Plumb.  All  I  know  is  this :  the  Public  Printer  has  stated  that  he  found  the 
Typographical  Union  in  possession  of  the  Government  Printing  Office  when  he 
came  in;  that  he  did  not  believe  the  establishment  could  be  run  without  the  con 
sent  of  the  Typographical  Union ;  that  is,  he  did  not  believe  printers  of  sufficient 
skill  could  be  had  in  the  United  States  to  meet  the  needs  of  that  office,  unless  they 


'Came  from  and  at  the  dictation  of  the  Typographical  Union.  I  know  that  a  person 
was  employed  in  that  department  as  a  proof-reader,  and  that  immediately  after  his 
employment  an  emissary  of  the  Typographical  Union,  himself  employed  in  the  de¬ 
partment,  came  to  him  and  asked  him  for  his  card  or  certificate  of  membership  in 
the  Columbia  Typographical  Union,  and  I  think,  perhaps,  also,  that  he  added  that 
the  body  issues  a  special  permit  to  a  man  to  be  employed  in  the  Government  Print¬ 
ing  Office.  At  all  events  he  was  called  on  for  his  card  of  membership.  He  said 
lie  had  none,  upon  which  he  was  notified  that  he  could  not  work  in  the  Government 
Printing  Office,  and  he  was  discharged  because  he  did  not  choose  to  pay  #6  and 
join  the  Columbia  Typographical  Union. 

Mr.  Hale.  By  whom  was  he  told  that  he  could  not  be  employed  if  he  did  not 
join  ? 

Mr.  Plumb.  An  emissary  of  the  Typographical  Union,  who  was  also  an  employe 
■of  the  Government  Printing  Office,  and  still  in  the  employment  of  that  establish¬ 
ment. 

Mr.  Hale.  I  am  told  that  the  superintendent  sympathizes  with  this  feeling  that 
it  ought  to  be  broken  up.  I  hope  that  is  so. 

Mr.  Plumb.  I  can  not  say  as  to  that,  but  still  I  have  no  doubt  he  would  make 
any  correction  he  should  be  authorized  by  law  to  make.  I  believe  he  ought  as  a 
matter  of  his  own  responsibility,  of  his  own  duty  and  obligation  as  an  officer  of  the 
Government,  to  establish  his  own  rules  and  regulations  for  the  employment  of  the 
persons  in  that  department,  entirely  independent  of  the  rules  and  regulations  of 
any  society  or  association  whatever. 

I  was  myself  a  printer  at  one  time ;  I  sympathize  with  that  very  meritorious  class 
of  people ;  I  certainly  mean  to  sympathize,  as  I  think  I  do,  with  every  man  who 
wants  to  labor  and  with  every  man  who  wants  the  best  possible  price  for  his  labor ; 
But  I  do  not  sympathize  with  any  man  whose  desire  to  labor  is  so  strong  that  it  re¬ 
quires  him  to  say,  and  to  put  extraordinary  means  into  execution  to  say,  that  some 
other  man  shall  not  labor  or  shall  only  labor  on  the  terms  that  he  himself  imposes. 
I  believe  that  is  a  point  we  ought  not  to  go  to.  I  believe  the  Government  itself 
ought  not  to  commit  itself  any  more  to  such  specifications  of  employment  in  the 
Government  Printing  Office  than  it  would  similar  ones  in  regard  to  employment  in 
the  Treasury.  If  we  are  to  be  subjected  to  the  domination  in  this  important  de¬ 
partment  of  the  Government  of  an  outside  organization,  which  by  co-operation  at 
the  moment  might  choose  to  take  away  all  the  employes  of  the  Government  Print¬ 
ing  Office,  we  had  better  meet  that  on  the  threshold  before  it  grows  stronger  than 
it  now  is  and  break  it  up. 

As  the  Senator  from  Rhode  Island  says,  perhaps  these  men  ought  to  have  more 
wages  than  they  have  elsewhere.  The  matter  of  wages  in  this  connection  is  a  mat¬ 
ter  of  no  possible  consequence.  I  would  rather  pay  twice  the  wages  to  a  non-union 
pi-inter,  a  man  not  only  willing  to  labor  himself,  but  willing  that  other  men  shall 
labor  with  him  for  the  support  which  they  need  as  much  as  he,  than  to  pay  half  the 
wages  and  submit  to  the  irresponsible  control  which  now  exists  in  that  institution. 

That  is  a  question  which  we  shall  be  required  to  meet  at  some  time.  I  believe 
the  Public  Printer,  himself  a  practical  man,  who  has  had  occasion  to  employ  in  the 
private  employment  from  which  he  came  large  numbers  of  printers,  with  a  little  en- 


8 


couragement  to  do  this  would  faithfully  carry  out  any  hint  or  permission  we  give- 
him  in  the  law.  I  believe  he  ought  to  do  it.  I  believe  that  every  one  who  goes- 
into  that  employ  ought  to  go  in  free  from  any  allegiance  to  outside  associations- 
which  direct  what  the  wages  shall  be,  and  the  time  employed. 

We  have  raised  a  good  deal  of  fuss  about  political  assessments.  They  are  no- 
more  unauthorized,  no  more  pernicious  than  the  assessments  that  are  levied  on  the 
employes  of  the  Government  Printing  Office,  who  require  everybody  to  observe 
them.  The  hours  of  labor  are  not  only  established,  but  by  insidious  processes,  which 
they  know  best  how  to  employ,  particular  persons  become  favored  in  the  distribu¬ 
tion  of  the  work  of  that  office  in  such  a  way  that  some  men  make  very  considerable 
wages,  while  other  men,  equally  as  needy  and  equally  as  deserving,  make  nothing. 
The  portion  of  the  work  that  is  called  “  phat”  goes  to  one  man,  and  what  is  called 
“  lean”  goes  to  another;  one  man  gets  continuous  employment,  and  another  is  el¬ 
bowed  and  shoved  aside  and  is  kept  waiting  and  hungry.  The  work  is  carried  on 
in  that  way  to  minister  to  the  power  and  to  aid  the  purposes  of  this  Typographical 
Union,  and  the  Government  sits  here  and  simply  lets  the  functions  of  this  important 
department  of  the  Government  be  entirely  absorbed  by  this  organization. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  Mr.  President - 

Mr.  Morgan.  I  should  like  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Kansas  if  there  would  beany 
difficulty  in  bringing  printers  of  equal  ability  from  the  different  States  to  do  the 
work  of  the  Printing  Office  ? 

Mr.  Voorhees.  Mr.  President,  I  want  to  submit  a  few  words  on  behalf  of  the 
printers.  There  are  two  sides  of  a  question.  It  seems  that  only  one  side  of  this- 
question  has  been  heard  on  this  floor. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  The  Senator  from  Indiana  has  the  floor. 

Mr.  Morgan.  I  beg  pardon.  I  merely  wished  to  ask  the  question  of  the  Sena¬ 
tor  from  Kansas  before  he  took  his  seat. 

Mr.  Plumb.  There  would  be  no  trouble  in  filling  the  Government  Printing  Ofifice- 
from  every  State  in  the  Union  with  printers  who  do  not  belong  to  the  Typographi¬ 
cal  Union.  It  is  a  thing  of  the  past  almost.  The  Senator  from  Connecticut  [Mr. 
Hawley]  I  have  no  doubt  himself  can  bear  witness  to  the  fact  that  it  has- 
been  largely  broken  up  in  the  last  few  years,  and  that  it  does  not  exist  at  all  in  some 
States. 

Mr.  Morgan.  There  were  in  1880,  according  to  the  census  returns,  72, 726- 
printers  in  the  United  States,  and  I  suppose  that  ought  to  supply  a  sufficient  num¬ 
ber  for  the  Government  Office. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  rose,  Mr.  President,  for  the  purpose  of  saying  a  few  words  in. 
behalf  of  the  printers.  It  would  seem  from  the  debate  the  last  half  hour  here  as  if 
they  were  a  very  dangerous  class  of  people.  From  the  unbroken  strain  of  amazed 
and  indignant  talk  on  this  subject  it  would  seem  that  this  Government  had  been 
outraged  and  plundered  by  them.  That  is  not  my  understanding.  My  understand¬ 
ing  is  that  a  more  painstaking,  conscientious,  hard-working  class  of  people  does  not 
live  than  the  printers  who  are  now  in  question.  If  they  have  committed  any  abuse 
on  any  public  interest  I  should  like  to  have  it  pointed  out.  I  should  like  to  know 
what  they  have  done.  Have  they  received  too  much  pay  for  their  work  ?  I 
should  like  to  see  a  Senator  who  will  rise  here  and  say  so. 


9 


Mr.  Plumb.  Will  the  Senator  from  Indiana  permit  me  to  direct  his  attention  to* 
one  point  ? 

Mr.  Voorhees.  If  you  want  to  answer  that  point. 

Mr.  Plumb.  I  want  simply  to  state  the  abuse  I  speak  of.  While  they  want  to- 
labor  for  themselves,  and  do  good  labor  and  valuable  labor,  they  insist  that  nobody 
else  shall  labor  except  at  their  beck. 

Mr  Voorhees.  I  will  come  to  that  directly.  Let  us  take  things  as  they  are 
presented ;  I  want  to  settle  some  points  as  I  go  along.  I  do  not  understand  that 
anybody  pretends  that  these  men  get  too  much  pay  for  their  work.  I  want  to  set¬ 
tle  another  point :  I  do  not  understand  that  anybody  pretends  that  they  do  not  do 
their  work  well.  So  we  have  two  great  propositions  in  employment  and  labor ; 
one  is  that  the  work  is  done  well,  and  the  other  is  that  they  do  not  get  too  much 
pay  for  it.  Then  I  should  like  to  know  what  the  trouble  is  ?  The  Senator  from 
Kansas  says  the  trouble  is  that  they  are  associated  together  so  that  their  wages  shall 
not  be  reduced  by  somebody  coming  in  and  working  for  less.  That  is  about  the 
plain  statement. 

Mr.  Plumb.  No,  I  did  not  state  it  that  way. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  The  Senator  did  not  state  it  that  way,  but  that  is  all  that  he 
said. 

Mr.  Plumb.  The  Senator  from  Indiana  is  too  fair  to  misstate  me  so  grossly  as- 
that. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  do  not  pretend  that  that  was  your  statement,  but  that  was  the 
point  of  it. 

Mr.  Plumb.  You  say  that  is  what  I  said.  I  did  not  state  it. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  will  correct  myself,  then.  Of  course  I  meant  that  the  Senator 
said  so  simply  in  substance.  I  repeat  it,  the  Senator  from  Kansas  said  that  they 
would  not  allow  other  people  to  work,  in  so  many  words.  That  is  not  true,  and  he 
will  have  to  correct  his  statement  a  little  as  well  as  I  shall  have  to  correct  mine.  The 
Senator  said  they  were  associated  so  as  not  to  allow  men  to  come  in  and  underwork 
them  and  thus  reduce  their  wages. 

Mr.  Plumb,  No,  that  is  not  the  statement  I  made. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  did  not  say  it  was  the  statement.  I  say  that  is  what  you  meant.. 

Mr.  Plumb.  It  is  not  what  I  meant. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  Then  what  did  you  mean  ? 

Mr.  Plumb.  My  meaning  is  that  they  will  not  let  any  person  work  unless  he  first 
joins  their  association  and  subscribes  to  their  rules. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  And  work  at  the  same  wages. 

Mr.  Plumb.  But  it  is  more  than  a  question  of  wages.  It  is  general  direction  and! 
control  in  the  relation  of  labor. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  do  not  remember  how  the  Senator  from  Kansas  voted  on  the 
Chinese  question,  but  I  know  that  the  idea  of  protecting  American  labor  from  the 
competition  of  cheap  Chinese  labor  swayed  this  entire  Congress,  both  the  Senate 
and  House.  I  believe  in  fact  as  I  turn  my  eye  to  the  Chair  as  it  is  now  occupied 
that  about  the  only  conspicuous  and  distinguished  opponent  of  that  idea  is  now  in 
the  Chair.  I  do  not  remember  the  eloquence  of  the  Senator  from  Kansas  or  any. 
body  else’s  particularly  except  that  of  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  [Mr.  Hoar] 


10 


now  in  the  Chair  against  the  proposition  which  we  were  then  putting  in  the  form  of 
a  law  that  labor  in  this  country  should  not  be  brought  in  contact  with  cheap  labor 
from  China. 

I  said  I  intended  to  say  something  for  the  printer.  I  want  to  talk  on  his  side  for 
v  a  little  while.  The  way  he  reasons  is  this :  he  lias  as  much  right  to  protect  him¬ 
self  in  the  wages  that  will  give  him  bread  and  shelter  and  clothing  as  other  people 
have  to  protect  themselves.  Is  it  wrong  that  they  are  associated  together  ?  To  hear 
the  Senator  from  Maine  [Mr.  Hale]  and  .other  Senators  it  would  seem  as  if  there 
was  a  sort  of  Cataline  conspiracy.  There  is  not  an  association  in  the  world,  either 
of  talent,  or  labor,  or  capital,  that  does  not  do  exactly  the  same  thing. 

A  medical  association  fixes  the  fees,  and  if  one  of  their  number  comes  and  ad¬ 
ministers  quinine  for  less  than  the  agreed  fees,  he  will  be  expelled  from  that  associ- 
tion.  It  is  the  same  principle  exactly  with  the  Typographical  Union.  They  say  a 
man  must  work  at  particular  wages.  The  physicians  of  the  country  say  the  same 
thing,  and  if  one  is  employed  at  less  than  the  agreed  price,  those  who  are  already 
•employed  will  walk  away  from  the  bedside  of  sickness  and  leave  you  to  die.  In 
many  places  the  bar  have  their  associations  and  agreements  also.  Going  still  further, 
take  up  the  great  industries  of  the  country.  Take  the  Wool  Growers’  Association,  the 
Iron  Mongers’  Association,  the  Steel  Workers’  Association,  the  Spinners’  Association, 
liquor  Dealers’  Association,  to  say  nothing  of  that  master  of  all  associated  strength, 
the  National  Banking  Association.  No  words  of  reproach  for  them ;  no  outcry ;  no 
danger;  but  the  Typographical  Union,  those  men  who  work  day  and  night  at  their 
printers’  cases,  seem  to  alarm  Senators.  They  do  not  alarm  me.  I  am  much  more 
alarmed  at  the  National  Banking  Association  which  meets  every  year  at  Saratoga 
to  have  their  annual  congress,  when  the  champagne  corks  pop  and  the  terrapin  is 
good,  and  they  lay  down  lines  of  financial  policy  agreed  upon  in  luxury  and  splen¬ 
dor,  and  come  down  here  and  dictate  to  this  Congress  from  end  to  end  of  this  Cap¬ 
itol,  and  every  Senator  knows  it. 

These  typos  are  not  dictating  here.  The  Senator  from  Kansas  is  alarmed  ;  other 
Senators  are  alarmed,  and  they  say  this  thing  had  better  be  met  on  the  threshold. 
Let  us  meet  it  upon  the  threshold,  but  let  us  not  have  a  tempest  in  a  teapot  on  the 
threshold.  Talk  about  Congress  being  dictated  to  !  It  has  been  and  will  continue 
to  be  till  the  end  of  time  dictated  to  by  associated  capital,  associated  talent ;  but  less 
than  on  any  other  subject  will  it  be  dictated  to  by  Government  printers. 

Sir,  associated  talent,  associated  wealth,  associated  labor  have  governed  the  world 
in  all  times,  and  they  will  continue  to  do  so.  It  is  just  as  legitimate  and  just  as  inno¬ 
cent  and  harmless,  and  more  so,  for  these  people  who  toil  with  their  hands  and 
make  their  associations  to  protect  them  in  their  rights  as  it  is  to  those  who  are  more 
powerful. 

I  presented  a  paper  here  this  morning  from  an  association  known  as  workers 
in  iron  and  steel  in  my  State,  and  I  want  them  to  have  their  voice  heard.  It  is 
an  association  of  men  who  delve  in  the  earth  and  who  work  in  the  blast-furnaces 
and  all  that.  I  believe  they  have  as  much  right  to  be  heard  here  as  the  national 
association  of  banks.  Yet  how  different  would  have  been  the  reception  of  a  me¬ 
morial  of  the  annual  National  Banking  Association  held  at  Saratoga  from  that  which 
was  given  to  those  workers  in  iron  and  steel,  and  how  differently  we  would  speak 


11 


of  something  the  National  Banking  Association  was  doing  from  that  which  we  speak 
of  the  poor  Government  printers  down  here  with  no  voice  on  this  floor  ! 

Mr.  President,  I  can  generally  be  counted  on  on  that  side  which  is  not  here  to 
speak  for  itself.  It  seems  to  me  that  there  are  plenty  to  speak  on  the  other  side. 
It  seems  to  me  there  are  plenty  to  get  up  here  a  sort  of  fictitious  alarm  about 
the  Government  printers,  who  do  work  and  get  none  too  much  pay,  and  who  do  not 
want  to  be  underworked  by  others.  We  have  had  the  most  eloquent  appeals  here 
about  the  protection  of  American  labor.  That  is  just  what  this  Typographical  Union 
are  doing ;  they  are  protecting  American  labor  in  their  own  profession  and  calling. 

Mr.  Allison.  As  this  matter  is  not  involved  in  the  pending  item  of  appropriation, 

I  trust  now  we  shall  be  able  to  go  on  with  the  bill,  and  when  the  appropriation 
for  the  public  printing  comes  up,  of  course  any  amendment  Senators  may  desire  to 
suggest  will  be  in  order. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  The  Chair  had  announced  the  adoption  of  the  amend¬ 
ment  before  the  debate  began.  The  Chair  will  say  to  the  Senator  from  Iowa  that 
he  does  not  understand  there  is  any  objection  to  the  amendment  as  to  the  compen¬ 
sation  to  the  Public  Printer. 

Mr.  Hawley.  I  want  to  say  a  few  words  just  now,  as  a  member  of  the  Printing 
Committee,  so  as  to  let  all  the  remarks  appear  in  one  place  in  the  Record. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  The  Senator  from  Connecticut. 

Mr.  Hawley.  All  of  these  laborers  and  any  other  class  of  laborers  have  a  perfect 
right  to  form  an  association  for  their  mutual  benefit.  I  do  not  know  that  anybody 
denies  that  it  is  not  only  natural4  but  even  praiseworthy.  The  association  has  a  right 
to  agree  upon  a  price.  Two  men  or  2,000  men  have  a  right  to  agree  upon  the  price 
which  they  will  ask  for  their  labor.  In  the  next  place  they  have  aright  to  say  that 
they  will  not  work  when  they  can  not  get  their  price.  So  far  their  rights  are  indisr 
putable,  but  they  have  no  right  to  say  that  another  man  not  a  member  of  the  associ¬ 
ation  shall  not  work  in  the  place,  or  that  he  shall  not  work  even  for  a  lower  price  if 
he  chooses.  The  other  man,  not  a  member,  who  has  not  agreed  to  and  does  not 
agree  to  their  terms  may  come  in  and  desire  to  work,  and  he  may  be  willing  to 
work  for  a  little  less  rate,  and  the  employer  should  have  a  right  to  hire  him  and 
the  man  should  be  absolutely  protected  in  his  labor.  His  right  against  the  2,000 
is  just  as  good  as  theirs  against  him.  There  is  no  sort  of  doubt  about  those  princi¬ 
ples  thus  far. 

It  should  be  said,  in  order  to  state  the  case  fairly,  that  the  Government  itself  has  ' 
more  or  less  embarrassed  some  of  these  questions  by  establishing  an  eight -hour  law, 
and  that  brings  it  about  that  men  in  the  employ  of  the  Government  get  a  little  more 
wages  for  the  same  quantity  of  work  done.  The  Government  has  still  further  em¬ 
barrassed  the  question  by  establishing  the  rates  to  be  paid  those  who  do  not  work 
by  the  day,  the  prices  per  thousand  for  composition,  and  the  prices,  I  think,  per 
hour. 

If  we  desire  to  open  this  question  fully  to  the  absolute  control  of  the  Public 
Printer,  so  that  he  may  stand  precisely  in  the  position  of  a  private  employer,  we 
should  repeal  those  laws.  No  man  outside  of  Government  work  in  the  country 
is  bound  by  any  law4  to  call  eight  hours  a  day’s  work,  nor  is  he  bound  to  give  60 
cents  a  thousand  for  night  work.  If  you  wish  to  put  your  printer  in  a  perfectly  free 


position,  I  say  as  free  a  position  as  the  citizen  is  in,  you  should  repeal  those  two- 
statutes.  I  would  then  demand  of  the  Public  Printer,  if  that  is  to  be  your  policy, 
that  he  shall  employ  good  men  at  good  rates  and  defend  them  in  the  employment. 

I  do  not  object  to  giving  the  printers  a  little  more  there  than  they  have  in  some 
other  places.  Their  claim  for  that,  I  say  as  a  man  who  has  had  something  to 
do  with  the  employment  of  printers,  is  not  unreasonable,  and  for  this  reason :  the 
employment  is  uncertain,  sometimes  he  requires  more  printers  than  at  other  times. 
The  inevitable  result  is — you  may  say  it  is  their  fault — that  there  will  be  a  body  of 
printers  about  here  sometimes  who  will  have  no  work,  and  they  feel  under  those 
circumstances  that  when  they  are  at  woik  they  should  be  entitled  to  a  little  greater 
rate  of  compensation.  Those  are  general,  equitable  considerations. 

The  Public  Printer  should  be  in  a  condition  to  employ  people  for  good  wages  (and 
he  is  good  pay  and  gives  reasonable  wages)  upon  just  such  terms  as  I  in  my  private 
business,  or  as  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  or  anybody  else. 

While  I  sympathize  with  all  the  rights  of  association,  to  begin  with,  the  natural 
man  rises  up  in  opposition  to  dictation  from  anybody.  I  know  something  of  a  case 
like  that  suggested  by  the  Senator  from  Kansas.  If  a  good  and  honorable  and  hon¬ 
est  man  is  brought  here  and  employed  by  the  Public  Printer,  as  it  sometimes  has 
happened,  without  his  knowing  whether  the  man  belonged  to  the  association  or 
not,  the  members  of  the  association  ought  to  let  him  alone.  I  would  have  the  Public 
Printer  compel  the  observance  of  that  man’s  rights  as  an  American  citizen. 

The  whole  thing  needs  revision  if  Senators  are  going  to  do  what  they  seem  to 
indicate  and  desire  to  do  here. 

We  have  now  as  good  a  Public  Printer  as  in  my  opinion  we  have  ever  had,  and 
I  am  glad  the  committee  has  raised  his  wages  a  little,  and  I  would  add  $1,500  more, 
for  it  is  a  place  that  would  kill  Samson.  It  is  the  hardest- worked  place  in  the  Gov¬ 
ernment,  and  the  largest  printing  establishment  in  the  world,  and  I  would  be  glad 
to  give  him  more  wages  still,  that  he  might  be  able  to  insure  his  life  against  hard 
work. 

Mr.  Conger.  I  do  not  understand  from  anything  that  has  been  said  that  this  asso¬ 
ciation  undertook  to  dictate  at  all  to  the  Public  Printer  whom  he  should  employ  or 
whom  he  should  not  employ  otherwise  than  to  say  that  they  will  not  work  there  if 
certain  persons  are  employed. 

Mr.  Hawley.  That  they  have  a  right  to  say.  In  my  judgment  they  have  a  right 
to  say  whether  they  will  work  in  the  Public  Printing  Office ;  but  the  man  who 
does  not  belong  to  the  association  has  the  right  just  as  much  as  any  other  man  to  go 
and  ask  for  work  there. 

Mr.  Conger.  I  have  heard  this  question  discussed  at  one  time  and  another  for 
the  last  few  years,  and  I  never  yet  have  heard  that  the  printers’  association  ever 
undertook  to  control  or  dictate  any  terms  to  the  Public  Printer  or  the  Government, 
except  so  far  as  to  say  that  they  have  for  mutual  benefit  and  mutual  protection  or¬ 
ganized  all  over  the  United  States  to  protect  themselves,  as  every  other  class  of  people 
can  and  may  and  do  do.  They  say  if  the  Government  will  take  one  class  of  men. 
if  it  is  better  for  the  Government  to  employ  one  set  of  men  who  do  not  feel  an  in¬ 
terest  in  joining  together  with  them  for  mutual  protection,  they  will  go  elsewhere. 
"Who  is  to  condemn  them  for  that  proposition  ?  Can  the  Government  get  along  jus*. 


as  well  without  them?  If  it  can,  let  them  do  so;  that  is  all  they  say.  They  are 
bound  up  in  this  association  all  over  the  United  States,  the  printers  for  their  mutual 
protection,  for  their  mutual  improvement,  to  see  to  it  that  everybody  who  belongs 
to  the  craft  is  educated  in  the  craft,  is  capable  of  performing  the  duties  of  a  printer, 
as  I  believe  for  elevating  the  standard  of  skill  and  of  labor  and  of  education  and  sup¬ 
port,  and  for  all  the  things  that  these  •associations  are  formed  for,  for  mutual  benefit, 
for  supporting  their  sick,  for  burying  their  dead.  They  are  scattered  all  over  the 
United  States,  in  every  town  and  village,  a  mutual  benefit  society.  The  object  of 
that  is  good,  as  I  understand  it ;  it  is  beneficial  to  the  printer,  and  is  good  for  the 
art,  and  is  good  for  the  community,  and  is  elevating. 

All  I  have  ever  heard  anybody  assert  that  they  say  is  that  if  those  who  do  not 
belong  to  this  association,  if  those  who  are  willing  to  cut  under  wages  are  employed 
in  the  Government  Printing  Office,  they  do  not  desire  to  be  employed;  they  will 
leave.  The  Government  can  noi  afford  that.  Sir,  it  would  stop  the  action  of  both 
Houses  of  Congress  to-morrow,  if  that  printing  should  stop  one  day,  and  we  all 
know  it.  It  may  be  that  some  preliminary  steps  may  be  taken  to  organize  printers 
into  a  class  of  employes  like  those  in  other  Departments,  to  give  them  appoint¬ 
ments  and  give  them  salaries.  I  know  of  no  other  way  to  meet  this  without  doing 
injustice  to  the  printers  belonging  to  this  association,  as  I  suppose  probably  four- 
fifths  and  perhaps  nine-tenths  of  all  the  printers  in  the  United  States  do  belong  to 
it.  I  do  not  know  why  Congress  should  commence  with  a  threat  against  this  class 
of  men.  Unfortunately  or  fortunately,  as  it  may  be,  Congress  and  the  country 
would  suffer  without  their  services  to-day  and  every  day.  If  the  men  belonging  to 
the  association  throughout  the  United  States  were  to  leave  the  different  offices 
where  they  are  employed  at  any  one  day,  the  entire  circulation  of  the  newspapers, 
the  entire  working  of  the  presses,  the  entire  business  of  the  setting  of  type,  would 
stop  as  if  an  earthquake  had  stopped  their  business. 

Those  are  facts  that  we  must  look  at.  It  is  the  condition  of  the  country,  not  only 
in  Washington,  but  in  every  city  in  the  Union.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is  desirable 
to  threaten,  as  has  been  done  here,  that  every  member  of  a  printers’  association,  a 
benevolent  relief  society,  as  it  virtually  is,  should  be  threatened  on  the  floor  of  the 
.Senate  with  being  turned  out  of  position  under  the  Government  because  he  be¬ 
longed  to  such  an  association,  which  has  nothing  wrong  in  it,  but  everything  that 
tends  to  elevate  that  class  of  American  citizens,  any  more  than  any  other  class  you 
have  legislated  against  or  condemned  on  this  floor. 

Mr.  Hawley.  The  Public  Printer  would  have  no  right  to  say,  no  citizen  would 
have  a  right  to  say,  of  any  person  seeking  employment  that  he  should  not  belong 
to  any  voluntary  association.  I  do  not  think  he  would  have  a  right  to  do  that.  He 
would  have  a  perfect  right  to  say,  however,  “  These  are  all  the  wages  I  have  to 
give,  all  I  ought  to  give,  and  I  will  employ  nobody  except  at  these  wages  and  on 
these  terms.”  But  the  employer  has  a  right  to  say  what  he  will  give,  whether  the 
person  belong  to  an  association  outside  or  any  association  in  the  trade,  or  anything 
of  that  sort. 

Mr.  Conger.  There  is  no  denial  of  that  by  any  member  of  the  association.  All 
that  they  say  to  the  Printer  or  all  that  they  say  to  the  Government  or  in  the  hearing 
of  the  country  is  that  if  the  Government  or  the  Public  Printer  does  not  see  fit  to  ac- 


14 


cede  to  those  terms  they  will  leave.  They  have  a  right  to  do  that  in  my  judgment. 
The  Government  can  supply  their  places  by  wandering  printers  who  belong  to  no 
association  and  will  belong  to  no  association,  for  I  understand  all  may  join  this  and 
the  fee  is  very  small ;  the  dues  are  small.  All  who  desire  to  promote  the  order  and 
the  efficiency  of  the  printers  of  their  class  and  the  well-being  of  their  families  may 
unite  together  in  this;  and  the  only  penalty  for  appointing  that  class  of  men  is  that 
the  printers  of  these  relief  associations  say  that  they  will  not  work  under  certain 
conditions,  and  will  leave  the  Government  free  to  get  its  men  where  it  can. 

Mr.  Plumb.  Mr.  President,  it  is  proper  to  have  a  fair  statement  of  this  matter,  it 
having  been  brought  under  discussion.  I  did  not  introduce  it  here,  but  I  had  oc¬ 
casion  to  say  something  about  it,  and  I  do  not  intend  to  be  misrepresented  by  the 
Senator  from  Indiana,  or  anybody  else. 

There  is  no  question  about  the  quality  of  the  work,  or  the  character  of  the  men 
who  are  performing  it  at  the  Government  Printing  Office.  Both  are  good,  the 
work  and  the  character  of  the  men  who  are  doing  it.  I  believe  in  fixing  the  wages- 
by  law,  just  as  we  fix  the  wages  by  law  in  the  various  other  departments  of  the  Gov¬ 
ernment.  There  is  no  reason  why  that  should  not  be  so.  I  am  entirely  willing 
that  the  wages  shall  Ire  as  they  are  now,  if  they  are  satisfactory,  as  I  understand 
they  are.  I  am  not  only  willing  but  believe  in  an  organization  of  printers  and  other 
people,  professional  and  otherwise,  for  their  own  mutual  protection.  There  can  be 
no  question  about  that  right;  and,  as  the  Senator  from  Indiana  says,  perhaps  that 
ought  even  to  be  encouraged. 

But  the  action  of  the  printers’  union  does  not  end  there  at  all.  What  they  pro¬ 
pose  to  do  is  well  stated  by  the  Senator  from  Michigan,  [Mr.  Conger.]  Pie  says, 
if  they  take  a  notion  that  they  will  not  work  for  the  Government  the  Government 
must  stop;  Congress  cannot  carry  on  any  business  if  they  see  fit  to  have  it  other¬ 
wise.  That  states  the  case  as  strong  as  I  can  state  it.  We  are  to-day  at  the  mercy 
of  these  men,  and  are  bidden  by  their  advocate  on  this  floor  to  speak  with  bated 
breath  about  them  and  about  our  relations  with  them  for  fear  on  the  whole  that  we 
may  be  obliged  to  adjourn  nem.  con.  The  trouble  is  not  that  they  say  they  ought 
to  have  certain  wages  and  will  not  %vork  for  less;  the  Government  fixes  the  wages 
in  this  case ;  but  they  say  in  substance  that  no  one  shall  work  for  those  wages  ex¬ 
cept  he  first  joins  their  association  and  agrees  that  when  they  say  he  shall  quit  work, 
quit  he  shall,  and  in  every  way  submit  himself  to  their  dictation,  which  practically 
amounts  to  their  saying  that  no  man  but  a  member  of  their  organization  shall  work 
in  the  Government  Printing  Office. 

In  addition  to  that,  what  is  further  striking  in  the  effort  to  maintain  their  monop¬ 
oly  of  employment,  they  prescribe  the  number  of  persons  who  alone  shall  serve  as 
apprentices  in  any  printing  office  where  they  are  employed.  The  very  second  para¬ 
graph  of  the  article  on  that  subject  in  the  constitution  of  this  local  Columbia  Typo¬ 
graphical  Union  says  that  the  number  of  apprentices  in  the  Government  Printing 
Office  shall  not  exceed  twenty,  and  that  has  the  force  of  law.  What  is  this  country 
if  it  is  not  to  be  a  free  country,  for  men  to  labor  in,  at  least  ?  Where  is  the  freedom- 
in  labor?  Where  is  the  natural  aspiration  of  your  boy,  Mr.  President,  or  my  boy, 
or  the  boys  of  any  of  us  to  learn  the  printers’  trade  if  that  is  to  be  canonized  into 
law  and  their  disposition  to  learn  the  trade  and  pursue  it  as  an  honorable  and  profit- 


able  calling  is  thus  ruthlessly  cut  oft  ?  The  law  substantially  makes  that  thing  per¬ 
manent  and  gives  it  effect.  There  is  the  trouble.  No  one  complains  about  these 
people  having  any  organization.  We  are  doing  everything  we  can  by  law  to  give 
free  course  to  labor,  to  give  good  wages,  to  give  encouragement  to  labor ;  but  I  tell 
you,  Mr.  President,  that  an  organization  of  this  kind  does  not  conduce  to  either  of 
those  things.  It  conduces  to  the  monopoly  of  those  functions  in  the  hands  of  a  few. 
It  does  not  even  conduce  to  the  highest  quality  of  labor. 

The  Senator  from  Michigan  says  the  Government  can  not  be  run  without  print¬ 
ing.  I  admit  that  for  thirty  days  it  would  have  to  stop,  but  I  would  undertake,  and 
no  doubt  many  other  men  would  undertake,  and  give  large  bonds,  to  put  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  Printing  Office  in  the  possession  of  qualified  men  to  run  it  in  every  depart¬ 
ment  as  well  and  fully  as  it  is  run  now  in  thirty  days  without  a  single  printer  in  it 
belonging  to  any  union  in  the  United  States.  The  statement  is  not  correct  that  a 
majority  of  the  printers  belong  to  it ;  but  whether  they  do  or  not  is  entirely  imma¬ 
terial.  There  are  about  2,000  members  of  the  local  union  here,  perhaps  not  so 
many,  perhaps  not  more  than  a  thousand,  but  the  other  72,000  members  of  the  print¬ 
ers’  craft  in  the  United  States  are  prevented  from  coming  here  and  having  employ¬ 
ment  in  the  Government  Printing  Office  unless  when  they  come  here  they  will  join 
the  union  in  this  place  and  submit  themselves  absolutely  and  unqualifiedly  to  its 
direction. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia.  Mr.  President,  I  shall  prolong  this  discussion  but  a 
very  few  moments.  I  hope  that  the  Committee  on  Printing  will  have  an  amend¬ 
ment  of  some  kind  prepared  to  offer  to  the  sundry  civil  bill  which  will  meet  the 
case  we  have  been  discussing  this  morning. 

On  the  evening  of  the  27th  of  February,  at  a  special  meeting  of  the 
Union,  we  were  appointed,  with  instructions  to  memorialize  the  Senate 
to  take  no  such  action  as  this  debate  indicated.  The  committee  pro¬ 
ceeded  that  night  to  prepare  a  memorial,  and  on  the  following  morning 
it  was  printed  and  taken  to  the  Capitol.  Upon  arriving  there  it  was 
found  that  an  amendment  had  already  been  reported  from  the  Senate 
Committee  on  Printing  and  referred  to  the  Appropriations  Committee 
of  that  body.  It  was  then  determined  to  include  in  our  memorial  the 
objections  to  this  amendment,  which  was  done.  The  memorial  was 
then  laid  on  Senators’  desks,  and  the  committee  bent  their  energies  to 
defeating  the  objectionable  amendment.  Before  proceeding  to  give 
.  our  experiences  in  this  regard  we  present  here  the  amendment  re¬ 
ferred  to  and  our  memorial : 

Amendment  intended  to  be  proposed  by  Mr.  Anthony,  from  the  Committee  on 
Printing,  to  the  bill  (Ii.  R.  7595)  making  appropriations  for  sundry  civil  expenses 
of  the  Government  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1884,  and  for  other  pur¬ 
poses,  viz. :  Insert  the  following  : 

And  the  Public  Printer  is  directed,  in  the  expenditure  of  the  money  herein  ap¬ 
propriated,  to  employ  the  highest  character  of  skilled  workmen,  at  the  fair  market 


I 


16 

price  of  labor,  having  reference  to  the  prices  paid  in  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and 
Richmond,  and  also  to  the  uncertain  tenure  of  employment  in  the  Government 
Printing  Office  /  and  in  case  that  he  can  not  obtain  a  sufficient  supply  on  these  terms, 
he  is  authorized  to  expend  such  portion  of  the  appropriation  as  shall  be  necessary 
for  the  temporary  execution  of  such  work  outside  of  the  Government  Office. 

Memorial  of  Columbia  Typographical  Union,  No.  ioi,  Protesting  Against 
Legislation  Hostile  to  the  Interests  of  Labor. 

To  the  Honorable  Senate  of  the  United  States  : 

We,  the  undersigned,  a  committee  appointed  by  Columbia  Typographical  Union, 
No.  ioi,  respectfully  represent  to  your  honorable  body  the  following  facts„our  de¬ 
sign  being  to  correct  many  misstatements  made  in  the  United  States' Senate  on  Sat¬ 
urday  last,  during  the  debate  on  the  amendment  to  the  legislative,  executive,  and 
judicial  appropriation  bill  increasing  the  salary  of  the  Public  Printer : 

The  statement  that  the  Public  Printer  has  hardly  any  control  over  his  printers, 
and  that  he  is  at  the  mercy  of  the  Printers’  Union,  is  untrue.  The  Public  Printer 
has  absolute  control  over  his  printers.  It  is  true  that  the  Printers’  Union  has  cer¬ 
tain  rules  and  regulations,  but  these  rules  and  regulations  are  in  strict  conformity 
with  the  following  law,  passed  by  Congress  July  31,  1876  : 

*  *  *  “  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Public  Printer  to  employ  no  workmen  not 

thoroughly  skilled  in  their  respective  branches  of  industry,  as  shown  by  a  trial  of 
their  skill  under  his  direction.” 

The  union  admits  to  membership  any  man  or  woman  who  has  learned  the  print¬ 
ing  business,  and  it  has  among  its  members  men  and  women  from  all  parts  of  the 
United  States ;  in  fact,  from  all  parts  of  the  world.  Of  course,  it  will  not  admit  a 
person  who  has  no  knowledge  of  the  printing  business,  any  more  than  a  law  associ¬ 
ation  would  admit  a  doctor  or  a  shoemaker.  This  union  is  one  link  of  a  chain  of 
typographical  unions  which  extends  all  over  the  United  States  and  Canada,  and 
printers  from  any  city  in  the  United  States  and  Canada  are  eligible  to  membership. 
A  member  of  one  of  these  unions  is  eligible  to  membership  in  any  other  union  by 
presenting  his  certificate  of  membership  in  his  own  union.  In  short,  certificates 
of  membership  are  interchangeable.  This  chain  of  typographical  unions  is  under 
the  direction  of  a  supreme  body — the  International  Typographical  Union — whose 
policy  has  always  been  to  accomplish  by  arbitration  what  many  persons,  and  especi¬ 
ally  some  honorable  Senators,  suppose  we  accomplish  by  dictation  and  force.  This 
has  always  been  the  policy  of  Columbia  Typographical  Union,  No.  101,  especially 
when  treating  with  the  Government. 

As  an  example  of  the  “tyranny”  and  “dictation”  which  our  Union  is  guilty 
of  toward  the  Public  Printer,  an  honorable  Senator  refers  to  a  person  who  was 
appointed  a  proof-reader,  but  was  forbidden  by  our  union  to  work,  and  was  discharged 
“  because  he  did  not  choose  to  pay  $ 6  and  join  the  union.”  A  simple  statement 
of  the  facts  will  show  where  the  “  dictation  ”  came  from.  The  person  referred  to 
as  a  proof-reader  was  appointed  to  that  position  upon  the  urgent  recommendation 
of  a  Senator.  Although  not  a  printer,  the  Senator  was  very  urgent  that  he  should 
be  appointed  chief  proof-reader,  but  finally  compromised  on  the  former  position. 


17 


He  was  offered  a  clerkship  by  the  Public  Printer  but  declined  it,  for  reasons  which, 
perhaps,  the  Senator  best  knows.  As,  not  being  a  printer,  he  could  not  be  admitted 
to  our  Union,  and  finding  that  it  was  the  evident  intention  to  force  upon  us  an  issue' 
which  would  bring  us  in  collision  with  the  Government,  the  Union  formally  with¬ 
drew  all  opposition  to  his  employment,  and  he,  with  an  assistant,  as  “copy-holder,” 
was  retained  on  the  pay-rolls  for  three  months,  at  an  expense  of  nearly  $600,  a  sum 
for  which  absolutely  no  equivalent  was  returned  by  this  proof-reader,  for  every  line 
.of  his  work  had  to  be  done  over  again  during  that  entire  three  months  !  Finally 
he  resigned,  utterly  unmolested  or  disturbed  by  us,  confessing  to  the  foreman  that 
he  was  not  competent  to  do  the  work !  The  law  was  violated  and  the  Treasury  was 
robbed,  and  neither  the  Public  Printer  nor  the  Typographical  Union  felt  strong 
•enough  to  prevent  it.  That  there  was  “  dictation”  here  is  plain,  but  it  is  equally 
plain  that  the  Union  was  not  the  dictator. 

Again,  it  is  charged  that  the  union  fixes  the  “rates  of  wages  and  the  time  em¬ 
ployed.”  All  that  it  is  necessary  to  say  in  reply  is  that  both  wages  and  time  are fixed 
by  law ;  that  Congress  four  years  since  reduced  our  wages  twenty  per  cent.,  unjustly 
;as  we  believe,  and  they  still  remain  at  that  figure.  Again,  the  charge  is  made 
that  the  Union  provides  and  enforces  a  rule  that  no  more  than  twenty  apprentices 
shall  be  employed  in  the  Government  Printing  Office.  This  charge  also  falls  to 
the  ground.  Such  a  provision  does  exist  in  our  by-laws,  but  it  is,  and  has  been 
■for  years,  a  dead  letter,  the  proof  of  which  is  found  in  the  fact  that  over  fifty  ap¬ 
prentices  are  now  employed,  exclusive  of  the  press-room  and  bindery. 

In  conclusion,  we  wish  to  say  that  Senators  who  believe  that  typographical 
unions  are  “  a  thing  of  the  past,”  are  mistaken  indeed.  Our  fellow-craftsmen  now 
number  many  thousands,  and  its  membership  is  rapidly  increasing.  Standing  be¬ 
hind  us,  fully  sympathizing  with  us,  quivering  when  we  are  struck,  are  the  members 
-of  our  fellow  unions,  who  are  numbered  by  the  hundreds  of  thousands,  and  their 
numbers  are  hourly  and  rapidly  increasing:  The  Senate,  the  House,  the  Executive, 
may  be  able  to  strike  a  destructive  blow  at  our  local  organization  which  will  shatter 
and  destroy ;  they  may  ruthlessly  “  weed  us  out,”  but  that  very  consummation  will 
give  us  a  hundred  ora  thousand  adherents  abroad  where  one  is  lost  here.  In  con¬ 
clusion,  before  inaugurating  a  policy  of  extermination  against  us  as  trade-unionists, 
we  ask  Senators  to  read  this  testimony  to  the  benefits  of  trade-unionism  from  Ex. 
Doc.  No.  21,  44th  Congress,  1st  session,  House  of  Representatives,  1876,  entitled 
“  Labor  in  Europe  and  America,”  by  Edward  Young,  Ph.  D.,  Chief  of  the  Bureau 
•of  Statistics;  it  is  an  extract  from  a  chapter  on  Trades-Unions  by  Mr.  Stanley  Jones  : 

“  Trades-unionism  in  England  is  an  established  fact,  and  a  power  which,  although 
many  politicians  try  to  shirk  or  avoid  it,  it  is  best  to  openly  admit.  The  unpreju¬ 
diced  observer  must  allow  that,  in  England,  trades-unions  have  raised  workingmen 
morally  and  intellectually,  and  have  taught  them  a  higher  sense  of  their  respon¬ 
sibilities.  They  have  increased  the  prices  and  shortened  the  hours  of  labor  ;  have 
educated  workingmen  to  a  knowledge  of  their  common  interest  and  common 
duty,  and  in  every  sense  have  raised  the  character  of  English  workmen.” 

Another  eminent  English  authority  quoted  on  the  same  page  (222),  the  British 
Quarterly  Review ,  says  : 

“  It  appears  pretty  clear  that  unionism  by  its  influence  has,  by  slow  degrees,  al¬ 
tered  for  the  better  the  circumstances  of  the  British  workmen.” 


18 


We,  too,  by  long  years  of  experience,  know  that  it  has  conferred  upon  us  innumer¬ 
able  pi-ivileges  and  blessings,  and  to  our  vision  it  is  the  harbinger  of  faith  and 
hope  for  the  future  for  millions  of  us  and  ours.  It  does  no  injustice  to  any  worker,, 
but  is  always  a  shield  against  injustice  and  oppression  for  the  whole. 

Therefore,  it  is  that,  as  representatives  of  the  most  numerous,  and  at  the  same 
time  most  helpless,  of  their  constituents,  the  wage  class  of  the  nation,  we  entreat 
Senators,  intrusted  with  the  gravest  functions  of  this  great  Republic,  to  pause  and 
consider  well  ere  they  enter  upon  a  policy  of  “  weeding  out  ”  and  “  extermination,” 
for  such  we  regard  it,  the  consequences  of  which  no  man  can  foresee. 

Y our  memorialists  wish  to  protest  against  the  passage  of  the  following  amendment 
to  the  sundry  civil  appropriation  bill : 

“  And  the  Public  Printer  is  directed,  in  the  expenditure  of  the  money  herein  ap¬ 
propriated,  to  employ  the  highest  character  of  skilled  workmen,  at  the  fair  market 
price  of  labor,  having  reference  to  the  prices  paid  in  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and 
Richmond,  and  also  to  the  uncertain  tenure  of  employment  in  the  Government 
Printing  Office  ;  and  in  case  that  he  can  not  obtain  a  sufficient  supply  on  these  terms, 
he  is  authorized  to  expend  such  portion  of  the  appropriation  as  shall  be  necessary 
for  the  temporary  execution  of  such  work  outside  of  the  Government  Office  .” 

This  amendment  is  a  blow  at  trades-unions,  but  put  in  a  shape  that  is  calcu¬ 
lated  to  deceive  the  friends  of  labor  organizations. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Public  Printer  has  the  power  now  to  employ  skilled  work¬ 
men,  and  he  can  and  does  “  weed  out  ”  incompetent  men  at  his  discretion. 

Second.  It  is  admitted  by  the  majority  of  Senators  and  Representatives  that  the 
“  market  price  ”  of  labor  in  the  Government  Office  is  not  too  high ;  and,  further¬ 
more,  they  have  fixed  the  rates  by  law,  so  that  reference  to  prices  in  other  cities 
is  really  not  to  be  considered  here. 

Third.  The  most  objectionable  feature  in  the  amendment  is  the  last  clause.  We 
consider  it,  in  plain  words,  an  attempt  to  make  the  Government  a  party  to  the 
breaking  up  of  trade-unions,  by  using  its  money  to  offer  a  premium  for  non-union 
labor.  The  Public  Printer  is  authorized  to  use  the  appropriations,  if  necessary,  to 
employ  non-union  men  at  higher  terms,  to  work  in  the  places  of  union  men.  This 
construction  of  the  clause  we  are  convinced  will  be  indorsed  as  the  only  plain  one 
by  every  unbiased  person.  This  clause  also  aims  at  giving  the  Public  Printer  power, 
in  case  of  trouble  with  the  union  men,  to  give  the  work  out  by  contract.  This, 
would  only  be  done  in  the  event  of  trouble  with  the  Union,  which  course  would 
throw  three-fourths  of  the  union  men  in  this  city  out  of  employment,  so  that,  take 
it  in  any  shape,  it  is  a  direct  thrust  at  organized  labor. 

And,  as  in  duty  bound,  your  memorialists  will  ever  pray. 

Your  committee  saw  a  number  of  Senators,  and  found  that  some 
one  had  been  lobbying  very  thoroughly  against  us.  As  indicated  in 
the  debate  by  Mr.  Plumb,  our  constitution  and  by-laws  were  quoted 
from,  and  almost  every  Senator  approached  asked  us  whether  we 
would  refuse  to  work  with  men  who  would  not  become  members  of 
our  Union,  or  whether  we  were  not  attempting  to  dictate  as  to  the 


19 


management  of  the  Government  Printing  Office.  A  friendly  Sena¬ 
tor  advised  us  by  all  means  to  see  the  Committee  on  Appropriations, 
where  the  objectionable  amendment  was  pending.  This  we  did,  and 
on  that  committee  we  found  the  following-named  Senators  : 

William  B.  Allison,  of  Iowa ; 

John  A.  Logan,  of  Illinois ; 

Henry  L.  Dawes,  of  Massachusetts  ; 

Preston  B.  Plumb,  of  Kansas ; 

Eugene  Hale,  of  Maine  ; 

Henry  G.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia ; 

James  B.  Beck,  of  Kentucky; 

Matt.  W.  Ransom,  of  North  Carolina ; 

Francis  W.  Cockrell,  of  Missouri. 

We  were  in  the  committee  room  but  a  few  moments  when  we 
found  ourselves  in  the  midst  of  our  enemies — surrounded,  as  it  were. 
We  were  questioned  and  cross-questioned,  very  much  as  in  a  criminal 
prosecution,  and  the  Union  was  characterized  as  a  secret  league,  an 
oath-bound  organization,  dictating  terms  to  the  Public  Printer,  and 
proscribing  from  work  ‘‘honest”  men  who  would  not  join  it.  Fear¬ 
ing  that  nothing  could  be  accomplished  favorable  to  our  cause,  we  left 
the  room,  very  much  discouraged.  This  interview  with  the  Appro¬ 
priations  Committee  developed  the  fact  that  the  fight  was  against  the 
Union,  and  not  so  much  against  the  rate  of  wages  paid  by  the  Gov¬ 
ernment. 

When  the  amendment  was  reported  back  to  the  Senate  in  the  sun¬ 
dry  civil  appropriation  bill  we  found  that  the  provision  for  scaling 
the  rates  with  those  in  Philadelphia,  Baltimore  and  Richmond,  had, 
much  to  our  surprise,  been  stricken  out,  which  was  a  point  gained  for 
us.  But  the  objectionable  contract  feature  remained.  This  was  struck 
out  in  open  Senate,  on  a  point  of  order  by  Mr.  Voorhees,  which 
elicited  the  following  debate  : 

The  amended  amendment  is  as  follows: 

“  And  the  Public  Printer  is  directed,  in  the  expenditure  of  the  money  herein  ap¬ 
propriated,  to  employ  the  highest  character  of  skilled  workmen,  at  the  prices  now 
fixed  by  law,  and  in  case  that  he  cannot  obtain  a  sufficient  supply  on  these  terms, 
he  is  authorized  to  expend  such  portion  of  the  appropriation  as  shall  be  necessary 
for  the  temporary  execution  of  such  work  outside  of  the  Government  Office.” 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  raise  the  point  of  order  on  the  amendment  from  the 
word  “  law,”  in  line  2245,  t°  the  word  “office,”  in  line  2248.  The  point  of  order 


20 


is  that  that  changes  an  existing  law  and  is  general  legislation.  The  present  law,  as 
contained  in  section  3786  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  provides  as  follows  : 

^Sec.  3786.  All  printing,  binding,  and  blank-books  for  the  Senate  or  House  of 
Representatives  and  the  Executive  and  Judicial  Departments  shall  be  done  at  the 
Government  Printing  Office,  except  in  cases  otherwise  provided  by  law.” 

The  law  I  have  read  provides  that  all  Government  printing  shall  be  done  at  the 
Government  Printing  Office.  It  also  provides  that  it  may  be  otherwise  provided  for  by 
law.  That  would  require  new  legislation,  and  that  is  what  this  proposes.  I  call 
the  attention  of  the  Chair  again  to  the  phraseology  of  this  provision  : 

“  And  the  Public  Printer  is  directed,  in  the  expenditure  of  the  money  herein  ap¬ 
propriated,  to  employ  the  highest  character  of  skilled  workmen  at  the  prices  now 
iixed  by  law — ” 

That  is  correct,  and  that  is  in  accordance  with  the  section  of  Revised  Statutes 
which  I  have  just  cited.  Then  follows  this  provision : 

and  in  case  that  he  can  not  obtain  a  sufficient  supply  on  these  terms,  he  is  authorized- 
to  expend  such  portion  of  the  appropriation  as  shall  be  necessary  for  the  'temporary 
■execution  of  such  work  outside  of  the  Government  Office.” 

That  is  to  say,  he  is  authorized  by  the  proposed  law  to  let  the  work  out  at  con¬ 
tract. 

The  President  pro  tempore.  Does  it  change  the  present  law  ? 

Mr.  Voorhees.  Undoubtedly  it  does. 

Mr.  Edmunds.  Let  us  see  about  that. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  Pardon  me  a  moment.  The  present  law  is  that  all  Govern¬ 
ment  printing  shall  be  done  at  the  Government  Printing  Office : 

“  All  printing,  binding,  and  blank-books  for  the  Senate  or  House  of  Representa¬ 
tives  and  the  Executive  and  Judicial  Departments  shall  be  done  at  the  Government 
Printing  Office — ” 

Suppose  it  stopped  there ;  but  it  does  not ;  it  goes  on — 

“except  in  cases  otherwise  provided  by  law.” 

That  is  what  it  is  now  proposed  to  do — otherwise  provide  by  law. 

Mr.  Allison.  This  is  a  mere  direction  as  to  the  appropriation  in  this  bill. 
That  is  all  there  is  about  it. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  On  the  contrary,  it  confers  a  power  on  the  Public  Printer, 
which  he  does  not  possess  at  this  time,  to  let  this  work  out  at  contract  outside  of  the 
Government  Office,  directly  in  the  teeth  of  the  language  of  the  statute. 

Mr.  Edmunds.  I  should  like  to  say  a  word  about  this  point  of  order.  I  en¬ 
tirely  agree  that  there  should  be  no  legislation  on  an  appropriation  bill  of  any  kind  ; 
but  I  have  never  carried  that  idea  so  far  as  to  hold  that  Congress  in  an  appropria¬ 
tion  bill  could  not  direct  how  the  money  that  it  appropriated  should  be  expended 
either  without  law  before  or  against  any  law  before.  If  it  merely  confines  the 
direction  to  the  expenditure  of  the  money  that  it  appropriates,  it  has  a  right  to  do  it 
consistently  with  our  rules,  because  you  can  not  have  an  appropriation  bill  without 
appropriating  money,  and  you  can  not  have  an  appropriation  bill  appropriating 
money  without  stating  the  objects  for  which  the  money  shall  be  expended. 


21 


Therefore  it  has  always  seemed  clear  to  me,  and  that  has  been  the  decision  of  the 
Senate  for  many  years  before  when  we  have  had  these  questions  stoutly  contested, 
that  where  the  direction  (which  is  legislation,  of  course,  just  as  the  appropriation  is) 
is  confined  to  the  appropriation,  to  the  expenditure  of  the  money  appropriated, 
which  can  not  be  paid  out  of  the  Treasury  without  the  consent  of  Congress,  Con¬ 
gress  may  say  that  it  shall  be  paid  for  moonbeams,  if  it  pleases,  although  the  Con¬ 
stitution  of  the  United  States  itself  might  say  that  no  money  should  be  paid  for  buy¬ 
ing  moonbeams.  Congress  by  an  appropriation  may  say  that  no  part  of  this  money 
shall  be  paid  beyond  the  extent  of  $5,000  for  the  salary  of  the  Chief  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  That  would  be  a  violation  of  existing  law, 
but  it  is  the  condition  upon  which  the  appropriation  goes,  and  therefore  it  merely 
regulates  the  expenditure  of  the  money.  That  has  always  been  the  rule ;  and  this 
appears  to  do  that  thing.  Run  through  this  bill  and  all  the  others  we  have  had, 
and  in  a  thousand  instances  where  money  is  appropriated  there  is  a  specific  direc¬ 
tion  as  to  how  it  shall  be  expended.  That  is  what  this  attempts  to  do.  Whether 
it  is  right  or  wrong  in  itself  on  its  merits  is  another  question. 

Mr.  Anthony.  The  rule  forbids  general  legislation  upon  appropriation  bills  ;  but 
this  is  not  general  legislation ;  it  is  legislation  that  is  confined  to  the  expenditure  of 
the  money  herein  appropriated.  It  does  not  affect  any  other  appropriation ;  it  does 
not  repeal  any  general  law.  After  the  money  herein  appropriated  has  been  ex¬ 
pended,  then  the  old  law  remains  in  force ;  it  is  not  repealed. 

Mr.  Garland.  I  refer  to  this  now  more  for  the  purpose  of  another  point  that  is 
coming  up  after  a  while  in  this  bill  than  for  this  particular  point.  The  question  of 
order  raised  by  the  Senator  from  Indiana,  it  seems  to  me,  is  sustained  by  the  letter 
of  the  rule  in  the  book  and  by  various  rulings  of  the  present  incumbent  of  the  chjfir. 
The  best  way  to  test  this  is  in  this  way :  Suppose  now  this  provision  does  not  exist, 
suppose  this  provision  is  out,  what  is  the  law  ?  The  law  is  in  section  3786,  read  by 
the  Senator  from  Indiana.  That  is  a  general  law.  Does  the  Chair  now  compre¬ 
hend  the  proposition  I  am  stating  ?  Have  I  stated  it  sufficiently  plain  ? 

The  President  pro  te?npore.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Garland.  Here  is  the  general  law  that  the  work  shall  be  done  in  the  Gov 
eminent  Printing  Office.  That  is  the  general  law  affecting  the  printing  done  for  all 
}he  Departments  of  this  Government.  That  is  displaced,  then,  by  these  lines  that 
the  Senator  from  Indiana  objects  to. 

The  President  pro  tempore.  The  Chair  understands  the  Senator.  In  the  opin¬ 
ion  of  the  Chair  the  point  is  well  taken  that  the  Senate  can  not  change  the  law  in 
an  appropriation  of  money. 

Mr.  Allison.  The  Chair  then  rules  that  we  can  appropriate  money,  but  can  not 
direct  how  it  shall  be  spent. 

The  President/^  tempore.  You  can  not  direct  that  it  shali  be  spent  contrary 
to  the  law  of  the  land,  which  is  in  this  case  that  the  work  must  be  done  in  the 
Government  Printing  Office.  The  question  is  on  that  part  of  the  amendment  not 
stricken  out  by  the  ruling. 

Mr.  ALLISON.  What  words  does  the  Chair  strike  out,  may  I  ask? 

The  President  pro  tempore.  They  will  be  read. 


22 


The  Acting  Secretary.  In  line  2245,  after  the  word  “  law,”  down  to  and  includ¬ 
ing  the  word  “  office,”  in  lirfe  2248,  as  follows  : 

“  And  in  case  that  he  can  not  obtain  a  sufficient  supply  on  these  terms,  he  is  au¬ 
thorized  to  expend  such  portion  of  the  appropriation  as  shall  be  necessary  for  the 
temporary  execution  of  such  work  outside  of  the  Government  Office.” 

The  President  pro  teinpore.  The  question  is  on  the  adoption  of  the  residue  of 
the  amendment. 

Mr.  Allison.  Then  I  move  to  strike  out  the  remainder  of  that  amendment  down 
to  line  2245,  down  to  the  part  the  Chair  has  struck  out,  as  follows: 

“  And  the  Public  Printer  is  directed,  in  the  expenditure  of  the  money  herein  ap¬ 
propriated,  to  employ  the  highest  character  of  skilled  workmen,  at  the  prices  now 
fixed  by  law.” 

The  President  pro  tempore.  Is  there  objection  to  doing  that  ?  The  Chair  hears 
none  ;  and  that  part  is  stricken  out. 

Mr.  Anthony.  Is  anything  left  of  the  amendment  ? 

The  President  pro  tempore.  The  amendment  stands  beginning  with  the  word 
«  provided,”  in  line  2249. 

Mr.  Anthony.  All  before  that  is  left  out  ? 

The  President  pro  tempore.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Anthony.  It  might  as  well  be ;  it  was  emasculated  by  the  Committee  on 
Appropriations. 

From  the  first  attack  upon  our  Union  in  the  Senate  it  is  plain  to  us 
that  it  was  an  attempted  war  upon  labor  organizations  generally,  and 
the  attempt  was  made  to  have  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  ini¬ 
tiate  it  and  back  it  up  with  enactments  and  money. 

The  amendment  was  drawn  to  deceive,  a  s  was  shown  by  the  fact 
that  Senators  friendly  to  us  did  not  see  the  effect  of  it  until  pointed 
out  by  our  memorial  and  personal  interviews.  The  evident  idea  was 
to  make  it,  on  its  face,  appear  harmless,  and  have  it  run  through  on 
an  appropriation  bill  without  its  being  noticed. 

Our  explanation  of  it  is  this  :  The  lowering  of  rates  to  those  pre¬ 
vailing  in  the  other  cities  named  was  to  cause  a  strike  in  the  Govern¬ 
ment  Office,  and  if  non-union  men  enough  could  not  be  obtained  im¬ 
mediately  to  get  out  the  work,  then  the  Public  Printer  was  to  give  it 
out  to  any  one  at  rates  lower  than  those  paid  in  any  union  office  in 
this  city.  We  deem  this  a  fair  view  of  the  effect  of  the  amendment. 

It  seems  to  us  an  outrage  that  we,  as  one  of  a  chain  of  labor  or¬ 
ganizations  of  the  country,  should  be  called  upon  to  defend  ourselves 
against  the  attacks  of  Senators  of  the  United  States,  when  the  lobbies 
of  the  Capitol  of  the  nation  are  filled  with  schemers  for  big  jobs  with 
money  in  them,  that  these  same  “indignant”  Senators  not  only 


23 


•do  not  protest  against,  but  assist  in  engineering  through.  Our  or¬ 
ganization,  as  we  told  these  Senators,  is  for  mutual  protection,  eleva¬ 
tion,  and  benefit.  We  violate  no  law.  We  have  done  the  work  of 
the  Government  for  more  than  half  a  century,  and  have  never  had, 
nor  do  we  wish  to  have,  any  trouble.  We  want  nothing  but  what  is 
just,  but  we  do  want  to  be  let  alone  in  the  management  of,  and  the 
making  of  rules  for,  the  better  regulation  of  our  trade  affairs. 

If  men  who  are  carried  into  the  Senate  under  the  wings  of  great 
corporations  insist  on  “  weeding  out”  union  wage-workers,  your  com¬ 
mittee  would  respectfully  recommend  that  you  and  all  unions,  of 
whatever  branch  of  industry,  should  meet  them  without  flinching. 

When  these  Senators  found  poring  in  upon  them  telegrams  from 
their  constituents  instructing  them  not  to  interfere  with  the  union 
printers  in  the  Government  Office,  they  were  quick  to  deny  that  such 
was  the  intention,  as  the  following  debate  will  show,  in  which  Mr. 
Anthony  plays  the  role  of  trickster  in  a  style  both  “childlike  and 
bland 

Mr.  Miller,  of  New  York.  I  present  a  memorial  in  the  form  of  a  telegram,  pro¬ 
testing  against  the  passage  of  an  act  to  prevent  the  employment  of  members  of  the 
Typographical  Union  at  the  Government  Printing  Office,  signed  by  Samuel  Gom- 
pers,  chairman  legislative  committee  of  Organized  Trade  and  Labor  Unions  of  the 
United  States ;  one  signed  by  Richard  Lyon,  president  of  the  Buffalo  Type  Union, 
and  several  others,  all  of  the  same  nature  and  all  of  which  are  requested  to  be  en¬ 
tered  as  memorials.  I  send  them  to  the  Secretary’s  desk,  and  ask  their  reference 
to  the  appropriate  committee. 

The  President  pro  tempore.  The  telegrams  will  lie  on  the  table  for  the  present. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  have  a  telegram  in  the  nature  of  a  petition,  which  I  present. 
At  a  meeting  of  the  Trades  and  Labor  Assembly  of  Indianapolis,  representing  the 
organized  labor  of  that  city  and  vicinity,  they  passed  a  resolution  and  forwarded  it 
to  me  to  be  presented  to  the  Senate,  which  I  do.  I  ask  that  it  may  be  read. 

The  President  pro  tempore.  It  will  be  read,  if  there  be  no  objection. 

The  Acting  Secretary  read  as  follows  : 

Resolved,  That  the  Trades  and  Labor  Assembly  of  Indianapolis,  representing  the 
organized  labor  of  this  city  and  vicinity,  earnestly  protest  through  Senators  against 
any  action  forbidding  employment  of  members  of  Typographical  Union  in  Govern¬ 
ment  Printing  Office. 

Steve.  A.  Bedel, 
President  Trades  Assembly. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  move  that  it  lie  on  the  table. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  Sherman.  I  have  a  paper  signed  by  Mr.  A.  W.  Thompson,  president  of  the 
Typographical  Union  of  Cleveland,  and  a  similar  one  from  Cincinnati,  stating  that 


24 


a  bill  is  pending  here  disqualifying  union  printers  from  holding  situations  in  the- 
Government  Printing  Office.  I  am  not  aware  of  any  such  bill  or  proposition  being: 
made  here. 

Mr.  Anthony.  There  is  no  such  bill  and  no  such  proposition,  and  no  such  in¬ 
timation  has  been  made  in  the  Senate,  or,  to  my  knowledge,  in  the  other  branch  of 
Congress. 

Mr.  Sherman.  Still  I  present  the  memorial.  The  persons  who  send  these  dis¬ 
patches  must  be  under  a  misapprehension,  for  I  do  not  know  of  any  such  proposition, 
as  they  describe  as  having  been  made  here. 

Mr.  Anthony.  Nobody  proposes  to  proscribe  the  members  of  the  Typographical. 
Union. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  I  am  very  glad  to  have  the  assurance  of  the  Senator  from  Rhode 
Island.  I  did  not  know  that  he  intended  to  make  such  a  statement,  and  it  was  not 
with  the  view  of  an  intention  of  that  kind  on  his  part  that  I  presented  the  resolu¬ 
tions.  It  is  possible,  however,  that  the  trades  union  at  Indianapolis  have  got  such- 
an  impression  at  that  distance. 

Mr.  Anthony.  The  impression  is  wholly  unfounded  from  anything  that  I  know 
of.  All  that  has  been  proposed  is  that  the  Government  Printer  may  be  allowed  to- 
employ  non-union  compositors  as  well  as  union  compositors. 

Mr.  Lapham.  I  desire  to  state  that  I  received  several  telegrams  yesterday  to  the 
same  import,  and  I  answered  the  parties  that  there  were  no  such  propositions 
pending. 

Mr.  Hawley.  Perhaps  as  others  are  doing  so  I  ought  to  acknowledge  the  re¬ 
ceipt  of  two  or  three  dispatches,  but  I  tpok  them  as  being  directed  to  myself  per¬ 
sonally  rather  than  to  be  intended  for  presentation  to  the  Senate. 

Mr.  Dawes.  I  am  in  receipt  of  a  telegram  addressed  to  my  colleague  and  my¬ 
self  from  the  printers’  union  to  the  same  purport;  and  I  hope  the  statement  of  the 
Senator  from  Rhode  Island  will  be  the  answer  which  ought  to  be  made  to  that 
telegram  and  will  be  noticed  by  the  senders. 

Mr.  Pendleton.  I  have  a  similar  dispatch  from  the  Typographical  Union  of  Cin¬ 
cinnati  pertaining  to  the  same  subject,  and  I  ask  that  it  lie  on  the  table. 

The  President  pro  tempore.  It  will  lie  on  the  table. 

Mr.  Jackson.  I  have  a  resolution  from  the  Typographical  Union  of  Memphis,, 
Tennessee,  addressed  to  myself  and  colleague,  on  the  subject  just  referred  to  about 
the  Printing  Office.  I  move  that  it  lie  on  the  table. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  Blair.  I  have  received  a  telegram  from  the  Philadelphia  Typographical. 
Union,  in  which  they  protest  against  action  of  which  they  are  apprehensive. 

Mr.  Anthony.  What  is  the  action  ? 

Mr.  Blair.  Action  hostile  to  the  Typographical  Union.  I  do  not  propose  to  lay 
the  telegram  upon  the  table.  I  merely  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  I  have  re¬ 
ceived  the  telegram.  I  do  not  think  it  is  in  a  form  which  makes  it  proper  to  be¬ 
laid  on  the  table  of  the  Senate. 

Was  there  ever  bolder  effrontery?  Look  at  it!  The  amendment 
offered  by  this  very  Senator  [Anthony]  proposes  to  introduce  non- 


25 


union  men  into  the  office,  and  goes  farther,  as  it  plainly  says  that  the 
rates  shall  be  scaled  by  those  in  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and  Rich¬ 
mond.  In  either  of  those  cities  the  rates  are  20  per  cent,  lower  than 
in  Washington,  and  in  one  at  least — Richmond — 30  per  cent,  lower 
and  yet  this  Senator  has  the  audacity  to  say  that  no  interference  is  in¬ 
tended  with  union  men. 

But  all  this  seems  to  be  a  lesson  for  workingmen,  and  that  lesson  is 
to  unite  all  tradesmen  in  the  United  States  into  leagues  or  assemblies 
for  their  protection  against  capitalists,  who  now  dictate  legislation 
against  our  interests  in  the  halls  of  Congress. 

This  is  not  a  Government  printers’  fight ;  it  is  more  grave  than 
that ;  it  is  capital  against  labor  in  these  United  States,  and  the  sooner 
our  /ellow-workmen  throughout  the  country  realize  the  fact  the  bet¬ 
ter  for  all  of  us.  It  should  be  carried  to  the  polls  in  the  various  States, 
and  none  but  workingmen  put  on  guard.  This  is  the  only  way  it 
can  be  met.  This  outbreak  upon  us  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  has 
already  had  its  effect,  in  the  knowledge  of  your  committee,  of  making 
workingmen  forswear  allegiance  to  party,  and  if  this  case  is  properly 
published  to  all  labor  organizations  throughout  the  country,  as  it 
should  be,  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  its  effect. 

It  is  with  a  deep  sense  of  gratitude  that  we  should  acknowledge  and 
be  thankful  for  the 'unsolicited  impromptu  remarks  in  our  behalf  by 
the  able  Senators,  Messrs.  Daniel  W.  Voorhees,  of  Indiana,  and  Omar 
D.  Conger,  of  Michigan.  The  attack  upon  us  was  made  without  warn¬ 
ing,  and  the  remarks  of  these  honorable  Senators  were  made  without 
time  for  preparation ;  so  that  coming,  as  they  did,  on  the  impulse  of 
the  moment,  we  see  they  were  the  utterances  of  men  who  are  true 
and  consistent  advocates  of  the  rights  of  the  wage-workers  of  this 
country.  We  owe  them  a  debt  which  something  more  potent  than 
words  may  yet,  in  the  hands  of  the  toiling  masses,  repay.  Occasion 
makes  the  man,  and  in  this  case  our  bitter  foes  in  the  Senate  brought 
forward  champions  of  our  cause,  unsolicited,  who  “bested”  them  at 
every  thrust. 

The  prompt  action  of  sister  unions,  in  sending  telegrams  and  peti¬ 
tions,  had  great  weight  in  preventing  hostile  legislation.  The  receipt 
of  them  in  the  Senate  caused  a  flutter,  and  coming,  as  they  did,  from 
constituents,  the  legislators  looked  about  them  to  see  what  the  matter 
was.  We  owe  our  success,  in  great  part,  to  this  assistance,  and  your 
committee  take  this  opportunity  to  make  grateful  acknowledgments. 

Your  committee  also  think  proper  to  testify  to  proffers  of  assistance 


26 


by  numerous  Senators  and  Members  of  Congress,  and  various  courte¬ 
sies  extended,  too  numerous,  in  fact,  to  specify. 

The  assistance  of  members  of  other  local  organizations,  and  also 
members  of  our  own  Union,  is  also  gratefully  acknowledged. 

All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

A.  D.  Brock, 

Geo.  M.  Depue, 

A.  P.  Marston, 

Geo.  J.  Webb, 

J.  P.  Hamilton, 

W.  W.  Maloney, 
Samuel  Haldeman, 
Committee. 


ADDRESS 


BY  A  JOINT  COMMITTEE  OP  THE  PRINTERS1  AND  BOOKBINDERS1  UNIONS  OF 
THE  CITY  OF  WASHINGTON, 


A 


CCOMPANYING  THE 


Presentation 


of  JDanes 


RESPECTIVELY  TO  SENATORS  D.  W.  VOORHEES  AND  OMAR  D. 
CONGER,  IN  APPRECIATION  OF  THEIR  ELOQUENT  DE¬ 
FENSE  OF  THE  RIGHTS  OF  LABOR  UNIONS 
IN  DEBATE  UPON  THE  FLOOR  OF 
THE  U.  S.  SENATE. 


Senator  :  We  have  been  commissioned  by  Columbia  Typographical  Union,  and 
by  the  Bookbinders1  Union,  embracing,  with  insignificant  exceptions,  every  mem¬ 
ber  of  their  respective  crafts  in  this  District,  to  formally  express  to  you  their  deep 
and  grateful  sense  of  the  obligation  conferred  upon  them,  and  upon  workingmen 
every  where,  by  your  unexpected  and  unsolicited  defense  upon  the  floor  of  the  Senate 
of  the  rights,  privileges,  and  objects  of  our  trades-unions.  Made,  as  it  was,  upon  the 
spur  of  the  moment,  in  the  face  of  an  almost  universal  chorus  of  misrepresentations, 
misstatements,  and  denunciations,  your  eloquent  arguments  and  your  clear  statements 
of  our  purposes  and  objects  prove  to  us  that  you  have  deeply  studied  questions  which 
we  believe  to  be  of  vital  moment  to  the  interests  of  all  workingmen,  and  that  you 
fully  comprehend  the  fact  that  the  great  majority  of  legislators  on  the  floors  of  Con¬ 
gress  are  either  actively  hostile  or  wholly  indifferent  to  the  interests  of  the  millions 
of  their  constituents,  whose  sole  capital  and  only  means  of  livelihood  is  in  the  labor 
of  their  hands.  Y ou  cannot  have  failed  to  note  the  fact  that  every  form  of  associated 
capital — powerful  trades-unions,  in  fact — employing  in  the  aggregate  many  hundreds 
if  not  thousands  of  millions  of  dollars,  is,  and  always  has  been,  efficiently  represented 
in  both  branches  of  the  national  legislature  ;  that  the  statute-books  of  the  nation  are 
mainly  compilations  and  aggregations  of  acts  intended  to  protect  and  encourage  the 
interests  of  property  and  of  capital  in  all  their  numerous  ramifications,  while  meas¬ 
ures  conceived  and  contrived  in  their  exclusive  interests  have  at  this  very  session 
crowded  out  all  chances  of  legislation  upon  subjects  of  the  most  important  and  vital 
character,  affecting  the  lives  and  welfare  of  the  working  people  of  every  condition 
and  degree ;  and  more,  sir,  when  malicious  and  cruel  aspersions,  wholly  unprovoked 
by  us,  were  uttered  in  the  United  States  Senate  upon  the  actions  and  motives  of  the 
Printers’  Union — which  is  but  one  of  hundreds  of  associated  unions  of  a  single  national 


28 


industry,  interlocking  with  and  representing  more  than  a  million  of  skilled  workmen 
in  all  the  other  branches  of  industry — out  of  seventy-eight  Senators,  with  a  solitaiy 
exception,  yours  was  the  only  voice  raised  in  defense  of  those  whose  misfortune  it 
is  that  their  labor  is  the  only  capital  not  “  protected  ”  in  any  schedule  of  the  tariff  bill. 

Senator,  it  is  difficult  for  us  to  find  words  strong  enough  to  fitly  express  our  sense 
of  the  obligation  you  have  imposed  upon  us  by  the  brave  and  manly  stand  you  have 
taken  in  our  behalf,  and  for  the  watchfulness  and  skill  you  have  shown  in  defeating 
the  cunningly-contrived  amendment  to  the  sundry  civil  bill,  engrafted  upon  it  in  the 
final  hours  of  the  session,  in  palpable  violation  of  an  express  rule  of  the  Senate,  and 
which  was  deliberately  concocted,  as  we  are  now  convinced,  to  inaugurate  an  issue 
with  our  union  which  should  result  in  compliance  with  the  threat  of  an  honorable 
Senator,  “  in  deliberately  and  ruthlessly  weeding  out  of  the  Government  Printing 
Office  every  member  of  that  union  /” 

We  have  therefore  been  instructed  by  our  respective  unions  to  present  you  with 
this  cane,  suitably  inscribed,  as  a  slight  additional  but  wholly  inadequate  testimonial 
of  our  appreciation  of  the  services  you  have  rendered  us. 

One  more  word,  Senator,  and  we  have  done.  Like  all  other  non-political  bodies,, 
we  number  among  our  members  men  of  both  political  parties,  but  upon  all  questions 
affecting  our  interests  as  trades-unionists  and  as  workingmen  our  allegiance  far  trans¬ 
cends  that  to  party.  On  such  questions  we  know  no  party,  but  act  together  as  a 
unit  for  our  mutual  protection  and  defense.  We  shall  therefore  take  due  measures 
to  provide  that  every  labor  organization  in  your  State  and  in  all  the  States  shall  be 
fully  advised  of  the  action  you  have  taken  in  our  and  their  behalf ;  and  we  further 
assure  you,  Senator,  that  we  shall  henceforth  watch  your  career  as  a  public  man 
with  the  deepest  interest,  and  that  if,  in  the  vicissitudes  of  party  politics,  we  may  be 
able  to  discern  a  time  or  place  when  or  where  the  labors,  voices,  or  votes  of  work¬ 
ingmen  can  be  of  service  to  you,  we  shall  not  wait  to  be  invited  to  do  our  utmost  in 
your  behalf.  ' 


H.  S.  Linker,  President , 
A.  Thomas, 

H.  C.  Espey, 


E.  C.  Grumley,  President , 
A.  D.  Brock, 

Geo.  M.  Depue, 

A.  P.  Marston, 


Com.  of  Bookbinders''  Union . 


Geo.  J.  Webb, 

J.  P.  Hamilton, 

W.  W.  Maloney, 

Samuel  Haldeman, 

Com.  of  Printers'1  Union. 


Washington,  D.  C.,  March  6,  1883. 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. 


Washington,  D.  C., 

March  7,  1883. 

Gentlemen  :  Your  communication  of  yesterday  and  the  beautiful  token  of  your 
regard  which  accompanied  it  have  been  received.  This  generous  action  on  the  part 
■of  the  unions  which  you  represent  is  so  wholly  unexpected  and  unlooked  for  on  my 
part  that  it  is  difficult  in  fitting  words  to  make  my  proper  acknowledgments. 

The  few  words  which  I  said  in  the  Senate  in  behalf  of  the  Printers’  and  Book¬ 
binders’  Unions  of  Washington  were  not  prompted  by  a  word  of  solicitation  from  any 
■one.  They  were  simply  the  long  cherished  convictions  of  my  mind,  and  would 
have  been  spoken  for  any  other  of  the  many  labor  organizations  of  the  country  whose 
rights  were  called  in  question. 

The  sole  capital  of  the  workingmen  and  women  of  the  United  States,  and  of  the 
world,  is  the  labor  of  their  hands,  guided  by  their  acquired  skill,  and  I  maintain  that 
they  have  the  same  right  to  combine,  organize,  co-operate,  and  unite  for  their  pro¬ 
tection,  profit,  and  advancement  which  the  corporations  of  millionaires  have  to  exist. 
Indeed,  their  right  is  not  only  the  same,  but  their  duty  to  do  so  is  a  far  higher  one. 
Disunited,  the  daily  laborers  of  the  world  are  at  the  mercy  of  those  powerful  com¬ 
binations  of  capital  which  traffic  in  cheap  wages.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is 
strength  in  union.  Your  unions  are  founded  upon  principles  of  justice,  benevolence, 
and  industry.  They  have  done  the  printing  and  binding  of  this  Government  for  the 
last  fifty  years,  and  their  record  of  skill  and  fidelity  will  last  forever.  I  do  not  be¬ 
lieve  their  enemies  will  ever  prevail  against  them.  I  am  glad  if  I  have  contributed 
to  their  discomfiture. 

While  I  do  not  feel  that  my  conduct  in  the  Senate  called  for  any  recognition  at 
your  hands,  yet  you  have  my  grateful  thanks  for  your  kind  words  and  the  handsome 
present.  1  shall  keep  and  cherish  the  cane  as  a  lasting  evidence  of  my  good  fortune 
in  securing  the  favor  of  the  Printers’  and  Bookbinders’  Unions  of  Washington,  while 
simply  discharging  a  plain  duty  not  only  to  them  but  to  all  laboring  people. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  with  the  highest  respect, 

Your  friend  and  obedient  servant, 

D.  W.  VOORHEES. 


E.  C.  Grumley,  H.  S.  Linker,  and  others. 


30 


Senate  Chamber, 
Washington,  D.  C.,  March  26,  1883. 

Dear  Sirs:  I  have  received  your  very  flattering  address,  accompanied  by  the 
beautiful  cane,  which  you  presented  to  me  in  behalf  of  the  Columbia  Typographical 
Union  and  by  the  Bookbinders’  Union  of  the  District  of  Columbia. 

Permit  me  to  express  through  you  to  the  societies  you  represent  my  grateful  ac¬ 
knowledgments  for  this  token  of  their  approval,  and  to  yourselves,  personally,  my 
sincere  thanks  for  the  kind  and  graceful  manner  in  which  you  have  conveyed  to  me 
their  message. 

I  had  learned  beforehand  that  your  unions  had  been  formed  for  mutual  benefit,, 
assistance,  encouragement,  education  in  your  craft,  protection  to  your  labor,  your 
skill,  your  compensations,  and  your  general  well  being ;  that  temperance,  morality,, 
charity,  relief  of  the  sick,  destitute,  and  bereaved  among  the  members  of  your  unions 
and  of  their  families  were  prominent  and  essential  elements  of  your  organizations  \ 
that  through  their  influences  the  burdens  of  labor  would  be  lightened,  the  irksome¬ 
ness  of  toil  be  alleviated,  the  domestic  virtues  be  cultivated,  higher  degrees  of  skill 
be  attained,  and  the  general  welfare  of  your  ancient  and  noble  craft  be  promoted — 
purposes  and  objects  that  should  bring  honor,  not  detraction,  applause,  not  perse¬ 
cution. 

I  could  sympathize  in  your  praiseworthy  purposes  and  I  could  share  your  pride 
and  pleasure  in  the  gradual  accomplishment  of  your  original  designs. 

The  first  words  that  occurred  to  me  to  say  when  I  believed  you  were  misunder¬ 
stood  and  misrepresented  sprang  from  such  views  of  your  organization  and  its  be¬ 
neficent  purposes,  and  I  trust  you  will  believe  that  my  sympathies  were  with  you 
because  my  lot  in  life  was  cast  among  the  sons  and  daughters  of  toil,  amid  the  de¬ 
privations  of  frontier  life,  amid  incessant  efforts  to  improve  both  mental  and  physical 
conditions,  and  that  I  am  proud  of  the  advancement  and  attainments  of  our  people 
in  all  the  departments  of  industry  and  skill. 

Accept,  gentlemen,  for  yourselves  and  those  you  represent,  my  thanks  for  your 
kindness,  and  believe  me, 

Most  truly  yours, 

O.  D.  CONGER. 

E.  C.  Grumley,  H.  S.  Linker,  and  gentlemen  of  the  committees. 


